Friday, January 22, 2016

PRO Rugby Announces San Diego Team

PRO Rugby has officially announced San Diego as the third team in the league. Like Sacramento and San Francisco, the two other officially announced sides, the San Diego team has yet to be named. The team will play out of Torero Stadium on the campus of the University of San Diego. The 6,000 seat stadium is host the USD football and soccer teams and was also host to the San Diego Spirit of the defunct WUSA.

San Diego makes the third California team in the league. For the first year competition travel is a factor and having another team in the West fits in with the overall goals of the league. San Diego also is a magnet for the talent that resides in Southern California. With several clubs to draw upon San Diego could be considered one of the early favorites, even before players have been assigned.

Take the jump to read more.
As we noted yesterday, solidifying agreements with venues has held PRO Rugby back from making more announcements. From what TIAR understands agreements have been signed with two more cities for a total of five. One in the Intermountain West and the other east of the Mississippi. One of those teams has been widely mentioned in the past, the other could surprise a few people. Those teams should be announced shortly and it's likely the competition is only going to go with five teams this year. Once the remaining venues are announced look for a slew of announcements regarding coaches and players.

Right now the idea is that each team will play the other teams in the competition three times for a 12 match season. In terms of personnel, most of the players have already been identified and there are a number of capped foreign players that should find their way into the league.

What do you make of the news?


  1. Partisans will be sore that California is slated for three teams, while their burg missed out. But can you blame Pro Rugby for seeking to capitalize on 125 years of rugby participation and excellence in the most affluent state in the union?

    Look at the roster from 1920/1924 Olympic team and the 2015 RWC squad and count the Californians. Did Major League Lacrosse receive a similar level of outcry from San Franciscans and Angelinos when they were snubbed in favor of the Mid-Atlantic in the inaugural season?

    1. I get why there are teams in California, but let's not go crazy fluffing up the state. Wasn't California bankrupt like 3 years ago? Seattle should have a team, Denver, New York, and a case could be made for a Midwest team in Chicago or Columbus, and one could also be made for Atlanta.

    2. Not sure what the finances of the state government have to do with this equation. But for the record, the state ran a surplus of $1 billion three years ago. The more relevant data is the incomes/media markets to support the league in Silicon Valley and Southern California, which are ample.

      As for other venues, I'm looking forward to Houston and Atlanta getting teams. There is a history of great teams, Eagles support, and $ in both cities.

  2. Now only 5 teams...and only one west of the Mississippi the downhill slide begins...

  3. I'm happy, and could see myself planning on a trip to San Diego to see a game and enjoy the sights.
    Now I'm really curious about the players, especially the capped international players, who presumably have a history that I can look up.
    Teams don't need a name yet, let that evolve.
    Just city names will suffice for now.
    Let's get playing and deal with names and logos and mascots in the off-season.

  4. I think its crap. Spread it out over the US not just the west territory. Midwest has a lot of talent. It's ok for Chicago to hold major international matches but not have a team? Same goes for Philly. Should of called this California Pro Rugby.

  5. People, none of you have any experience starting a pro sports league from scratch. Why don't you actually read what Pro Rugby is putting out and see that there are major financial, legal, and regulatory requirements that must be met for each team. This isn't like starting a crappy men's side playing in D3. Get behind the league so that it can be solvent and eventually expand.

    1. "I feel justified in complaining because I've run a low performance, volunteer based social side that often has as many as 16 athletes at a single practice!"

  6. I'm disappointed but I understand the realities. However, it's hard to form a rooting interest (as a Bostonian) for a league that primarily exists in California. I'll watch, but I won't be as engaged as I would be if there was a team close to me. I'm sure I won't be alone in that.

    It's all well and good to say "support the league" but it's going to be hard to get a real buzz going outside the general area the league exists. As a soccer fan, MLS had this same problem for many years. People wanted it to do well, but didn't engage until they got their own (or close) team.

    Just my two cents.